MovieChat Forums > The Killing of a Chinese Bookie (1976) Discussion > 1978 Version is NOT a trimmed own versio...

1978 Version is NOT a trimmed own version of the original

posted 17 years ago by eelwheelies
7 replies | jump to latest

Cassevetes hated the first version, he said he was RUSHED into making it, and was not proud of it and it bombed, and he took time and only wanted people to see the 1978 version which isn't a cut-down version of the original, rather it's a DIFFERENT VERSION, as in, it has MANY SCENES that aren't in the original version, the original which is called the LONGER VERSION, which is true, technically, but is also misleading, because in most cases when you have a shorter version it means it's been edited from the master, which in fact the 1978 version is NOT a trimmed down original but rather a totally different, more coherant and an overall better film...

And, it's the only one that the director wanted shown after being RUSHED into making the first one, which is longer only because it wasn't edited the way it should have been.

That's not my opinion, it's the opinion of the late great JC.

[–] thrillhousejhs11 17 years ago

You know I felt the same way watching the film; Criterion has a two-disc DVD out with the '76 cut on the first disc--which lead me to believe it was the definitive version--I watched it and was just bored by it (this being only the second Cassavetes film I've seen, I watched Shadows first). I found the '78 version is a little more compelling and a relatively better film. It was a lot like watching the theatrical cut of "Blade Runner" versus it's superior director's cut, some films are just salvaged by editing.
_____
Yeah, I'm so bad I kick my own ass twice a day.
-Creeper, the Hamburger Pimp from "Dolemite"

[–] Emunah 16 years ago

Hm. I thought the same thing, longer cuts are usually better (kingdom of heaven, blade runner, heaven's gate), but i guess in this case, the shorter version might be better. i got the criterion disc too, based on your opinion, i think i'll go ahead and see the 108 minute version instead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFtYpLV4EPo

[–] ossioj 16 years ago

There's a lot of shorter cuts that are better than the longer ones. For example, Apocalypse Now, the original version, is twice as good as the Redux.

[–] PrawoJazdy 15 years ago

I just watched the longer version..didn't read this thread first.

Did I miss anything? I enjoyed it a lot, my favorite Cassevettes film have seen so far.

I looked over the chapter list in both movies, didn't seem as though I missed anything. Other than some editing, is there any additional footage in the shorter version?

[–] Stonewall44 12 years ago

I would like to know the answer to this as well, as I've only seen the shorter version.

[–] bmusler-1 14 years ago

The shorter version of THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH is infinitely better than the longer version IMO. Maybe it says something about 70's films.

[–] supercygnus 12 years ago

You had me right until the Blade Runner bit.